Mr. Thrifty posted this comment to a previous post at 6:16 PM on September 18th (today). I moved it, unedited, here as it is a topic unto itself:
On Thursday, September 18, 2008 the Big Look Task Force will meet at: University of Portland 5000 N. Willamette Blvd. Portland, OR 97203 They will be getting input on critical Oregon land use planning decisions. Realtors will be there in force to try to provide additional pressure to open up farm and forrest land to rampant overdevelopement. They are also rallying against the task force incorporating anything regarding climate change into their thinking. They want anything dealing with climate change to be handled by the legislature where their lobbying dollars can buy them the strongest voice. Please join me there on the 18th to provide resistance against this ruthless and uncaring lobby who’s only interest is in exploiting Oregons precious farm and forrest land for profit.
The Big Look Task Force report is a 46 page PDF. I have not looked it over yet.
This is OAR’s position, as emailed to me:
1. “One size does not fit all” — there must be increased flexibility in our land use system that accounts for the regional differences throughout the state and allows for greater local determination of the specific needs of a community and/or region.
2. Standing — there must be clear parameters for who has standing to appeal a land use decision. Only those directly impacted by a land use decision should have standing to challenge. In addition, there must be a reduction in the number of allowable appeals if land is already zoned for increased density or a particular purpose.
3. Climate change — climate change is best addressed by the Oregon Global Warming Commission. The Big Look Task Force was given specific instruction by the legislature to examine our land use laws, and delving into the political quagmire of climate change would be counterproductive at best.
4. Accurate identification of resource lands — modern technology allows for a much more accurate determination of what constitutes “high value” farmland, and the antiquated soil classification system has resulted in “farm land” with zero to little growing potential to remain off limits to development.
5. Economic Development — there must be a higher value placed on employment lands. While the land use system was designed to protect farm and forest, the primary economic drivers in Oregon when SB 100 was enacted, the economy is far more diverse today. Our current land use system does not reflect or embrace this diversity.
I don’t have a platform on this as I have not educated myself on it yet.